Diane Feinstein has been making the rounds touting her new piece of anti-firearms legislation but she names no real specifics. Well in case you are wondering here is the list of what her bill will do taken from Guns.com:

• Reduces, from two to one, the number of permitted external features on various firearms. The 1994 ban permitted various firearms to be manufactured only if they were assembled with no more than one feature listed in the law. Feinstein’s new bill would prohibit the manufacture of the same firearms with even one of the features.

• Adopts new lists of prohibited external features. For example, whereas the 1994 ban applied to a rifle or shotgun the “pistol grip” of which “protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon,” the new bill would drastically expand the definition to include any “grip . . . or any other characteristic that can function as a grip.” Also, the new bill adds “forward grip” to the list of prohibiting features for rifles, defining it as “a grip located forward of the trigger that functions as a pistol grip.” Read literally and in conjunction with the reduction from two features to one, the new language would apply to every detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifle. At a minimum, it would, for example, ban all models of the AR-15, even those developed for compliance with California’s highly restrictive ban.

• Carries hyperbole further than the 1994 ban. Feinstein’s 1994 ban listed “grenade launcher” as one of the prohibiting features for rifles. Her 2013 bill carries goes even further into the ridiculous, by also listing “rocket launcher.” Such devices are restricted under the National Firearms Act and, obviously, are not standard components of the firearms Feinstein wants to ban. Perhaps a subsequent Feinstein bill will add “nuclear bomb,” “particle beam weapon,” or something else equally far-fetched to the features list.

• Expands the definition of “assault weapon” by including:

• Three very popular rifles: The M1 Carbine (introduced in 1944 and for many years sold by the federal government to individuals involved in marksmanship competition), a model of the Ruger Mini-14, and most or all models of the SKS.

• Any “semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds,” except for tubular-magazine .22s.

• Any “semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches,” any “semiautomatic handgun with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds,” and any semi-automatic handgun that has a threaded barrel.

• Requires owners of existing “assault weapons” to register them with the federal government under the National Firearms Act (NFA). The NFA imposes a $200 tax per firearm, and requires an owner to submit photographs and fingerprints to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), to inform the BATFE of the address where the firearm will be kept, and to obtain the BATFE’s permission to transport the firearm across state lines.

• Prohibits the transfer of “assault weapons.” Owners of other firearms, including those covered by the NFA, are permitted to sell them or pass them to heirs. However, under Feinstein’s new bill, “assault weapons” would remain with their current owners until their deaths, at which point they would be forfeited to the government.

• Prohibits the domestic manufacture and the importation of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition. The 1994 ban allowed the importation of such magazines that were manufactured before the ban took effect. Whereas the 1994 ban protected gun owners from errant prosecution by making the government prove when a magazine was made, the new ban includes no such protection. The new ban also requires firearm dealers to certify the date of manufacture of any >10-round magazine sold, a virtually impossible task, given that virtually no magazines are stamped with their date of manufacture.

• Targets handguns in defiance of the Supreme Court. The Court ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects the right to have handguns for self-defense, in large part on the basis of the fact handguns are the type of firearm “overwhelmingly chosen by American society for that lawful purpose.” Semi-automatic pistols, which are the most popular handguns today, are designed to use detachable magazines, and the magazines “overwhelmingly chosen” by Americans for self-defense are those that hold more than 10 rounds. Additionally, Feinstein’s list of nearly 1,000 firearms exempted by name (see next paragraph) contains not a single handgun. Sen. Feinstein advocated banning handguns before being elected to the Senate, though she carried a handgun for her own personal protection.

• Contains a larger piece of window dressing than the 1994 ban. Whereas the 1994 ban included a list of approximately 600 rifles and shotguns exempted from the ban by name, the new bill’s list is increased to nearly 1,000 rifles and shotguns. Other than for the 11 detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifles and one other semi-automatic rifle included in the list, however, the list appears to be pointless, because a separate provision of the bill exempts “any firearm that is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action.”

This is a huge, sweeping change in the way Americans can exercise their 2nd Amendment rights. But to me the biggest thing I noticed was the $200 per gun tax on each "assault weapon" registered under this new law. With an estimated 8.5 million "assault weapons" on the street that is a new $1.7 Billion tax on Americans.

And yes in my case that means I will have to pony up $1200 for the six "assualt weapons" I own which includes two family heirlooms an M1 carbine and a M14 both handed down from my father who purchased them from the CMP in the 1960's and both banned under this bill.

This legislation is full of holes and quite a burden on American families. I have never been more concerned for my freedoms than now. What would any of these measures have done to stop this killer in Newtown? If you limit the clips to 10 rounds he could have purchased more clips. If you register you gun (which in Connecticut you do) how would that have stopped him from killing his mother and taking it? And would not having a flash hider or bayonet lug have stopped him or a $200 tax stop him? Hell No! The only way to have stopped him would have been to have identified his illness in time to properly have treated it. Wake up America before it's too late!

Hunter, good points. I support reasonable restrictions on firearms. Background checks, mandatory training for first purchasers (free), and a limitation on magazine capacity for rifles greater than .22 Magnum caliber and all pistols. But the bottom line is that guns are tools and everything is subject to misuse. We can limits some of their utility for misuse.

Feinstein's bill doesn't stand a snowball's chance in an oven. Too many restrictions, too many requirements and cost is prohibitive. And any requirement for current owners of "assault rifles" to resgister them and pay $200 each is foolish, unenforceable (except at tremendous finanical and legal cost) and prohibited by the 2nd Amendment.

I agree with you guys here this bill goes to far! Hunter is correct in that this would have done nothing to stop the Newtown Killer! Gun_Nut is correct in that this will be a giant erosion of the 2nd Amendment and just another money grab by another flaming liberal. Bryant is correct in saying reasonable restrictions should be in place but this bill is not reasonable.

Fly RPG's are controlled under the NFA (National Firearms Act) and requires licenses and costs much beyond what most of us can afford. So if two were turned in I would say it was either (A) illegally owned items or (B) a planted item for the cameras.

FYI to legally own an RPG or fully automatic weapon requires 1. a $200 tax stamp 2. a Class III ATF dealer license or LEO use 3. a Federal background check with application approval by the FBI and finally 4. at least $10,000 because that is the starting price for most of these weapons.

So given this difficulty of purchase you can see where my skepticism would come from.

Fly, I disagree that whatever steps are taken will increase costs or taxes (at least not to the general public. And we don't need to use outlandish examples such as RPGs. There are enough fairly common examples to suffice for a reasonable discussion. Now, if you want to argue about the definition of "reasonable", that's an entirely different kettle of fish.

Bryant, I was referring to the recent proposal to provide armed guards for schools. Yes, the RPG example is outrageous but so are some of the glaring loopholes in the law ( Does anyone really need a 50 cal rifle?) --- and better record keeping and training will mean additional costs borne by gun owners or the general public. There is no free lunch.

I'm all for some semblance of reason in this debate--- a faint hope given the emotionalism that surrounds the topic.Given the very many Ted Nugent types, the power of the NRA and the economic clout of a multimillion-dollar gun industry, I think we can expect little change.

The peaceful devolution of power has always been one of the great strengths of this country ,but a number of gun advocates seem to insist that guns are needed to depose a tyrannical government--something that I find disturbing. We do not need such self-styled Minute Men.

Even more disturbing is the fact that the gun debate is just one part of the growing ossification of this country--- we are paralyzed by our dysfunction ,so we we do nothing. We are so fearful of any change that we are in great danger of losing the dynamism that has been the hallmark of this great country.So far we have been unwilling to address any part of the problem: mental health, the state of the nation's schools, the vast reservoir of the angry and the disaffected.

We can quail in the darkness ,or we can demonstrate the courage and civic engagement to make the hard choices that societies must make to move forward. It is as simple as that.

Watchman, I also have a 50 cal black powder muzzle- loader.The rifle I mentioned is NOT a black powder rifle ,but a modern semiauto sniper rifle for sale to the general public. Type in 50 cal on Youtube to see what I mean. A short clip depicted a shooter who was almost killed from a ricochet. Several others should give anyone a clear idea of the destructive power of this "tool."

The 50 cal is a terrorist's dream with the capability to bring down an airliner or immolate a gasoline tanker truck.Unless a hunter is shooting grizzlies or elephants, there is no need for this. Some of the off-the-wall proposals are not so off-the-wall upon further examination.

You did not specify a type of firearm (black powder or semi auto) you just mentioned a caliber. Very ambiguous language. Many people who know nothing about guns would agree with you that we need to "Ban .50 cal 'cuz nobody needs that". They would never consider the huge difference between a blackpowder .50 cal and a semi-auto .50 sniper rifle.

Truth is, as a gun owner, this inprecise language is what scares me - the law might intend one thing, but open the door for a whole lot of unintended things

Charlie you make a good point. Too many times I listen to the News Media or Politicians speak of banning Automatic weapons as if we had automatic weapons on the street which for the most part we don't. Full automatic weapons are restricted the very few in this country. Of course what these people are really talking about is semi-automatics.

Semi-automatics fire once when the trigger is pulled while full automatics continue to fire as long as the trigger is pulled. A not so subtle difference in my opinion; many of these much maligned “autos” like many shotguns can only fire three times before they are out of ammo and have to be re-loaded. Plus a practiced shooter can accurately fire a pump action almost as fast as a semi-auto so I guess after we get rid of semi-auto’s pumps would be next. All this ban talk is another case of treating the symptom and not the disease.

Georgia Gun Owners is opposed to mandatory government firearms training. But Georgia Gun Owners is not opposed to an individual choosing to participate in firearms training. In fact, anyone who writes to us asking about purchasing a firearm for the first time, we always encourage them to take a firearms ...

The 6,000 members and supporters of the premier grassroots gun rights group in Georgia, Georgia Gun Owners, began buzzing the phone lines of the Newt 2012 Iowa campaign headquarters (515-468-9225) demanding Mr. Gingrich apologize to gun owners for his more than two-decade history of supporting gun control. "Georgia Gun Owners ...

Hey all you Gun haters out there check this out! AP - Violent crime dropped 6 percent in 2010, marking the fourth straight year of year-to-year declines, while property crime was down for the eighth straight year, falling 2.7 percent, the FBI reported Monday. Nationwide, there were an estimated 1.2 ...

Please read the following press release from the NRA and then contact the committe with your support: Senate Bill 102 has been assigned to the House Judiciary Non-Civil Committee. At this time, no hearing has been scheduled. SB 102 passed in the state Senate by a 41 to 11 vote ...

Utah just named the John Browning Designed Colt 1911 as the official state firearm and Pennsylvania is considering naming the Pennsylvania Long Rifle its official state firearm. What firearm do you think Georgia should recognize as its official state gun? My pick would be the Glock 17. With their Smyrna ...